Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-46n74 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T20:11:58.258Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Estimating spatial variation in origination and extinction in deep time: a case study using the Permian–Triassic marine invertebrate fossil record

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2023

Bethany J. Allen*
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K. E-mail: p.b.wignall@leeds.ac.uk, d.j.hill@leeds.ac.uk, a.dunhill@leeds.ac.uk.
Matthew E. Clapham
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95064, U.S.A. E-mail: mclapham@ucsc.edu
Erin E. Saupe
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3AN, U.K. E-mail: erin.saupe@earth.ox.ac.uk
Paul B. Wignall
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K. E-mail: p.b.wignall@leeds.ac.uk, d.j.hill@leeds.ac.uk, a.dunhill@leeds.ac.uk.
Daniel J. Hill
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K. E-mail: p.b.wignall@leeds.ac.uk, d.j.hill@leeds.ac.uk, a.dunhill@leeds.ac.uk.
Alexander M. Dunhill
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K. E-mail: p.b.wignall@leeds.ac.uk, d.j.hill@leeds.ac.uk, a.dunhill@leeds.ac.uk.
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Understanding spatial variation in origination and extinction can help to unravel the mechanisms underlying macroevolutionary patterns. Although methods have been developed for estimating global origination and extinction rates from the fossil record, no framework exists for applying these methods to restricted spatial regions. Here, we test the efficacy of three metrics for regional analysis, using simulated fossil occurrences. These metrics are then applied to the marine invertebrate record of the Permian and Triassic to examine variation in extinction and origination rates across latitudes. Extinction and origination rates were generally uniform across latitudes for these time intervals, including during the Capitanian and Permian–Triassic mass extinctions. The small magnitude of this variation, combined with the possibility of its attribution to sampling bias, cautions against linking any observed differences to contrasting evolutionary dynamics. Our results indicate that origination and extinction levels were more variable across clades than across latitudes.

Information

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Paleontological Society
Figure 0

Figure 1. Schematic explaining (A) the construction of the simulated dataset and (B) implementation of the different methods of estimating origination and extinction proportions in a specific spatial bin. The triangles represent occurrences, while their shades indicate the species they belong to. “BC” refers to the “boundary-crosser” method (Foote 1999) and “3T” refers to the “three-timer” method (Alroy 2008). The 3T sampling correction is calculated using an equation that evaluates sampling completeness across the global dataset.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Algorithm for assigning a sequence of λ values to taxa ordered by abundance, converting λ values to a random draw from a Poisson distribution (note that the random draw values represent a single instance and will change in different trials), and discretizing the Poisson counts to extinct (zero value) or survive (nonzero value). This example shows one sequence out of 1201 that resulted in strong selectivity for increased survival of rare taxa.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Differences between “true” and estimated proportional origination and extinction. Proportions were compared between global and individual spatial bin scales. “BC” refers to the “boundary-crosser” method (Foote 1999) and “3T” refers to the “three-timer” method (Alroy 2008).

Figure 3

Table 1. Results of statistical tests comparing the mean differences between “true” and post-sampling estimated origination and extinction proportions with (A) 0 and (B) each other. Student's t-test was used to determine statistical significance, with p < 0.05 deemed to signify a significant difference. Cohen's D was used to determine effect size, with 0 < D < 0.3 considered a weak effect, 0.3 < D < 0.8 considered a moderate effect, and D > 0.8 considered a strong effect. n (number of samples) was less than the total number of spatial bins tested (6 × 10,000 = 60,000 bins), because some simulations resulted in sample sizes that were too small to allow calculation of the metrics.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Bias in observed extinction proportions under different simulation conditions of selectivity and subsample size. Positive bias indicates an overestimation relative to the “true” extinction rate; negative bias indicates an underestimation of extinction. Selectivity is measured by the log-odds ratio for the effect of abundance on survival, and sample size of the five different data subsets is indicated using different shades.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Bias in observed extinction proportions under different simulation conditions of selectivity and subsample size, comparing range through, boundary-crosser, and three-timer extinction rates when the preceding t0 bin or succeeding t2 bin are incompletely sampled.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Estimated generic-level origination and extinction by latitude for four different marine clades in each stage of the middle Permian to Middle Triassic. Occurrences were split into six 30° latitude bins. Estimates were calculated for each spatiotemporal bin containing five or more genera. Missing points indicate insufficient occurrences to calculate a proportion. “BC” refers to the “boundary-crosser” method (Foote 1999) and “3T” refers to the “three-timer” method (Alroy 2008).